Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Link to self hosted drafts, not IETF #49

Closed
jdesrosiers opened this issue Jul 13, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #54
Closed

Link to self hosted drafts, not IETF #49

jdesrosiers opened this issue Jul 13, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #54

Comments

@jdesrosiers
Copy link
Member

In a recent discussion, we learned that we can't count on IETF to host expired I-Ds. We currently count on that for hosting past draft releases. The only one we host is the current version. We need to start hosting the others as well.

This change has a few other benefits as well. We have been using I-Ds for our spec, but not the way they were intended to be used, which means that some of the things that normally apply to I-Ds don't apply to us. Most importantly, our drafts effectively don't expire. As long as they are used in the wild, they are relevant. Since we don't use I-Ds properly, linking to IETF causes confusion.

Which leads to the other benefit in that self-hosting may make other specifications feel more comfortable referencing our past specifications. When we point to IETF, the IETF rules about expiration apply, but when we self-host, we can claim different rules that make sense for our situation.


It appears that we currently host most of the draft html, but we only use it for the current spec. I don't know why. So, this task will mostly just require changing links. Drafts that don't already have html are 0, 2, 3, and 5.

@benjagm
Copy link
Collaborator

benjagm commented Jul 25, 2023

Thanks for start working on this!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants